Does it bother anyone else to see George W. compared to Hitler?

Let me put it this way: If you're still here to argue that Bush is even close to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc, YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST YOURSELF.

 

Hitler was not stupid. Hitler was an insane,evil genius that was a master of manipulation and intimidation.

 

Some of the tenets of the Bush administration do sound Hitler-ish. Pre-emptively invading other countries because they are supposedly a threat; polarizing issues by making statements such as 'you're either with us or with the terrorists'; promoting a strong sense of nationalistic fervor; heavy reliance on the military to try to achieve goals.

.

 

Be careful what you say. Bush just compared himself with FDR:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/30/bush.ap/index.html

"Franklin Roosevelt refused to accept that democracy was finished," Bush said. "His optimism reflected his belief that the enemy's will to power could not withstand our will to live in freedom."

.

 

Facts are things that are objectively true, not bullshit you pull of the web.

Made up bullshit.

Just like Clinton.

You are repasting photos provided by Saddam Hussein's ministry of information as "fact". How brainwashed can you get? What exactly is the scientific evidence that these babies were harmed by DU and not some other toxin? There is none, you simply copy and paste photos without any thought.

Politicians have always lied, and you are brainwashed by Buzzflash. So what?

Says you. 3,000 Canadians were not killed on 9/11, and "Death to Canada" is not regularly chanted at public gatherings in Iran.

What does this mean exactly - Bush should not respond to his critics? How is this an important point?

Worse than concentration camp conditions? I'd really like you to elaborate on how Abu Graib is worse than a concentration camp. Or is that just one of those things you say to sound radical but really you're just talking bullshit? And if torture is OK, why were Lynndie England and Charles Graner convicted?


Another braindead buzzflash victim.

 

Is there a huge difference between the way Canadians live with a reasonable media and the way Americans live with a fear-inducing media.

"Says you. 3,000 Canadians were not killed on 9/11, and "Death to Canada" is not regularly chanted at public gatherings in Iran."

ohhh so you are saying because of the fact that 3,000 americans died on 911 the media has the right to produce 24/7 fear based media? your real views are starting to come out coint-elpro break err...point break...

 

Yea and the people backing bush and putting him out in frnt of the cameras as their frontman are insane evil genius's that are masters of manipulation and intimidation.

 

Cointelpro = people who question the Illuminati conspiracy theory rather than being good little brainwashed followers of Alex Jones and any other crackpot who can put together a website.

How come you ran away from my questions about the London bombers? Still waiting for Alex Jones to give you the answers?

 

Have I called Balbus cointelpro? or anyone on thos forum for that matter? no, only you because you NEVER question things and debate, all you do is attack attack, make fun, attack, why don't you grow up

 

I am happy to be called cointelpro, a shape changing time travelling lizard jew, or an illuminati, or whatever. Who could possibly care.

And I do question things and debate. I question things and debate all the time. At least when I can find someone who is capable or willing to defend their points, which is pretty rare when most people are just cutting and pasting bullshit from conspiracy websites.

For example, I asked how Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo could be "worse than a concentration camp". Is this a cointelpro question because it catches an anti-Bush poster making a totally unsupportable statement?

Or would you like to explain how Abu Ghraib is worse than say Treblinka, where an estimated 850,000 people were exterminated? No, neither you not anybody else can explain how that makes sense, because it doesn't. And that's why you don't want people like me asking questions like that, because if I weren't around this sort of mind numbing stupidity would go unchallenged.

 

I just had to throw this in real quick.

When asked about DU usage, PB said, "So did Clinton" in effect saying it's okay to use DU because Bill Clinton did the same (I know that's not what you meant, or at least I hope it's not ha) But this to me looks like more evidence that both parties are there to keep people arguing over non-issues while the republicrats get power. "So did clinton", exactly, NWO.